High court order:

WPPIL/72/2011 4/4 ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

WRIT PETITION (PIL) No. 72 of 2011
=========================================================
NAVSARJANT RUST-THROUGH MANJULA PRADEEP – PETITIONER
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT-THROUGH SECRETARY & 15 – RESPONDENT
=========================================================
Appearance :
MR HEMANG M SHAH for PETITIONER : 1,
GOVERNMENT PLEADER for RESPONDENT : 1,3 – 7.
MR RITURAJ M MEENA for RESPONDENT : 2,
MS SEJAL K MANDAVIA for RESPONDENT : 4,
MR HS MUNSHAW for RESPONDENT : 8 – 9.
MS ANUJA S NANAVATI for RESPONDENT : 10,
NOTICE SERVED BY DS for RESPONDENT : 11, 13, 16,
MR MILAN N PATEL for RESPONDENT : 12,
MR JIGAR M PATEL for RESPONDENT : 12,
SINGHI & CO for RESPONDENT : 14,
NANAVATI ASSOCIATES for RESPONDENT : 15,
=========================================================
CORAM : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. S.J. MUKHOPADHAYA
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA
Date : 27/07/2011
ORAL ORDER
(Per : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. S.J. MUKHOPADHAYA)

In this petition under the caption; “Public Interest Litigation”, the petitioner has highlighted the facts relating to encroachments and pollution caused by one or the other respondents.

When the matter was taken up, it is informed that 10th, 11th and 13th respondents have already closed and they are not causing any pollution. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Gujarat Pollution Control Board [GPCB] submits that sample of 15th respondent has been taken to find out whether any pollution is being caused by them, report thereof is awaited.

So far as 12th and 14th respondents are concerned, it appears that there is some encroachment caused by them over the land either of the government of Corporation. Nothing has been stated with regard to 16th respondent.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of 12th respondent submits that respondent no.12 is a training institution and is not causing any pollution nor any encroachment has been caused by it over any government or Corporation land. According to the petitioner, there has been certain encroachment on block no. 86 caused by respondent no. 12 for which, Taluka Development Officer has already issued notice to which, the 12th respondent has already given reply.

Mr. Sudhir Nanavati, learned Senior Advocate, appearing on behalf of 10th respondent submitted that spot inspection of the said respondent be taken.

In the circumstances, the following order is passed:

[i] Gujarat Pollution Control Board is directed to make spot inspection, if not made, and find out whether any of the respondents, i.e. 15th or 16th respondent is causing pollution and thereby violating any of the provisions of the the Water [Prevention & Control Pollution] Act, 1974 and the Air [Prevention & Control of Pollution] Act, 1981 and Environmental Protection Act, 1986. Report should be submitted within a month. If the Board finds that any one of them is causing pollution, then it may pass appropriate orders as per the law.

[ii] So far as closed units are concerned, the Board may visit those units and also submit its report on the next date. In case of the closed units whose spot inspection/visit is undertaken by the Board and positive report is submitted in favour of such closed unit, it will be open for such unit to apply to the Gujarat Pollution Control Board.

[iv] So far as the encroachment made by any of the units is concerned, the petitioner will bring this fact to the notice of the Collector, Ahmedabad, Taluka Development Officer, Sanand, Ahmedabad and the concerned Mamlatdar. The petitioner will bring to their notice that one or the other respondent has encroached over any govt. land or the land which belongs to Panchayat or Corporation and they will make spot verification of the land occupied by such respondent and submit a report before this Court within one month. The petitioner will bring this fact to the notice of the concerned officer within seven days.

Post the matter along with the report, if any, filed, on on 29th August, 2011.

[S.J. MUKHOPADHAYA, CJ.]

[J.B.PARDIWALA, J.]
pirzada/-


High Court Order

WPPIL/72/2011 2/2 ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

WRIT PETITION (PIL) No. 72 of 2011

=========================================================

NAVSARJAN TRUST – THROUGH MANJULA PRADEEP – PETITIONER

Versus

STATE OF GUJARAT – THROUGH SECRETARY & 15 – RESPONDENT

=========================================================

Appearance :

MR SHALIN MEHTA with MR HEMANG M SHAH for PETITIONER : 1,

MR PK JANI, GOVERNMENT PLEADER for RESPONDENT : 1,

None for RESPONDENT : 2 – 16.

=========================================================

CORAM :              HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. S.J. MUKHOPADHAYA

and

HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA

Date : 28/06/2011

ORAL ORDER

(Per : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. S.J.MUKHOPADHAYA)

Let notice be issued on respondents. Learned Government Pleader Mr.Jani appears and waives notice on behalf of respondent nos.1,3,4,5,6 and 7.

Counsel for the petitioner will serve another copy of the paper book on him by 29th June 2011. Direct notice on rest of the respondents is permitted. The respondents are directed to file their reply affidavit within three weeks. The Court may pass appropriate order, if so required. Post the matter on 27th July 2011.

Pendency of the case shall not stand in the way of the Gujarat State Pollution Control Board to make spot inspection with regard to pollution, if any, committed by one or the other party and may submit the report.

(S.J.Mukhopadhaya, CJ.)

(J.B.Pardiwala, J.)

/moin

 

Advertisements